The 46th Annual Meeting of the IWC
in Puerto Vallarta, Mexico
1994

IWC/46/SEST1‘COMMERCIAL’ VS. ‘SUBSISTENCE,’ ‘ABORIGINAL’ VS.
‘NONABORIGINAL,’ AND THE CONCEPT OF SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT IN THE CONTEXT OFJAPANESE COASTAL FISHERIES MANAGEMENTThe Government of Japan
1994
The Concise Oxford Dictionary, “a minimal level ofexistence.” In other words, subsistence might imply poverty
and many subscribe to the view that if the people are notpoor, they are not engaged in subsistence activities. Being
relatively affluent is repeatedly used against Icelandic,
Japanese and Norwegian whalers.
At the phenomenological level, it has been pointed outthat both subsistence and commercial whalers are embedded
in a web of social exchanges: gift-giving, barter andexchanges through the medium of money (Moeran 1992).
There are no logical differences between the three formsof exchange and whale products must be regarded ascommodities produced for exchange and consumption
whether the hunt has been classified as ASW or ascommercial. What might be different is people’s moral
evaluation of these various forms of exchange. In Japaneseculture money is relatively unproblematic and money has
been used in gift-giving since ancient times. Today money
rather than an object is the prescribed gift in Japan (OhnukiTierney 1993: 72).
As ‘commercial whaling’ has not been defined by the
IWC it must be taken as a residual category to mean 'nonASW.’ But empirical research has shown, that small-typewhaling in Iceland, Japan and Norway is qualitatively
different from both ASW and high-seas industrial whaling
but has more in common with the former than with the latter.
In a report to the IWC in 1992, for example, many
similarities between minke whaling in Greenland on one
side and in Iceland, Japan and Norway on the other werepointed out (ISGSTW 1992 [IWC/44/SEST6]). The vessels
used in all four countries are relatively small and operatefrom remote communities with few land-based foodresources but with a strong sense of community identity.
Most of the boats are owner-operated and are operated underdomestic modes of production where household viability
and social reproduction are the important rationales. The
small crews are recruited through kinship and friendshipconnections, and there is little specialization among themand they typically participate in a share system which also
implies sharing the risk. The main product is whale meat
which is gifted, bartered and sold outside of the communities
but at the same time this meat is an important local sourceof nutrition and food culture. In contrast, large-type coastal
and pelagic whaling was operated by large fleets and undera capitalist mode of production with a high return on

The International Whaling Commission (IWC) makes
a major distinction between commercial whaling — on
which a moratorium has been imposed — and aboriginalsubsistence whaling (ASW), which is endorsed. Thisdistinction is based on the assumption that there is afundamental difference between commercial andsubsistence activities as well as between aboriginal and nonaboriginal peoples.
The purpose of this paper is to examine the concepts‘commercial,’ ‘subsistence,’ and ‘aboriginal people’ —items on which the IWC has based its management of
whales since the early 1980s — in order to show that thedistinction between ASW and commercial whaling, as
defined by IWC, is untenable.
If sustainable use is the aim of our management policies,
it matters little whether activities are termed 'commercial'or not, but there is, on the other hand, a growing awarenessthat local participation from the people who traditionallyhave used renewable natural resources is needed in orderto ensure sustainable use. This is the approach taken in thereport Caring for the Earth (IUCN/UNEP/WWF/1991). It
is felt that the IWC in recent years has moved further awayfrom a management regime based on meaningful local
participation.

COMMERCIAL VS. SUBSISTENCEWHALINGThe untenability of the distinction between subsistence
and commercial whaling has been pointed out by a numberof social scientists during the last few years and will only
be briefly outlined here. The criticism is both of a semantic(e.g. Freeman 1993) and a phenomenological (e.g. ISGSTW
1992; Moeran 1992) character.
At the semantic level it has been pointed out that theterm ‘subsistence’ is a complex one and can be used inseveral ways (Freeman 1993). One interpretation of the term
is self-sufficiency. According to this interpretation people
are supposed to produce what they need and their products
are supposed not to enter the market but to be consumed
locally to meet nutritional and cultural requirements.
However, anthropologists have shown that a self-sufficientsociety has hardly ever existed and that whalers in Alaska,
Greenland and Russia as well as in Iceland, Japan and
Norway are economically firmly integrated into the world
economy. Secondly, ‘subsistence’ can mean, according to263

IWC/46/SEST1

investment as the primary goal. The highly specializedcrews were often recruited through agents and the crew
members received salaries. The main product used to bewhale oil for which there used to be a great demand.
Hence, in terms of economic rationality the important
dividing line between various types of whaling does not go
between ASW and commercial whaling as implied by the
IWC’s usage of the concepts but rather between ASW andSTW on the one hand and large-type coastal and pelagic
whaling on the other. To bring in the concept ‘aboriginal’
does not clarify matters.

principle of mutual benefit, and international law. In
no case may a people be deprived of their means ofsubsistence.”
In order to achieve this objective — which is made toapply generally and is not restricted to aboriginal peoples —we must formulate co-management regimes which allow forsustainable harvest of living natural resources,1 whales
included, whether the local inhabitants are classified as noncommercial aboriginals or not. Today national andinternational bodies are seeking ways to design new
institutions which can ensure local participation in questions
related to resources management.
When it comes to management of coastal marine
resources, many scientists and bureaucrats have looked toJapan in their search for an alternative model to the one
which has been dominant — but not very successful — inwestern nations for decades. The important premise for theJapanese system of coastal management is the perceptionof the ‘closed’ sea which for centuries has enabled theartisanal fishermen in Japan to take an active role in the
management of their resources. At a time when the ideologyof the ‘freedom of the sea’ spread in Europe following the
publication of Hugo van Grotius’ influential book Mare
Liberum in 1609, the Japanese authorities 'closed' the coastal
waters and allocated small, exclusive territories tosettlements which were defined as fishing villages. At the
beginning of this century these territories became estatesfor Fisheries Cooperative Associations (FCAs) which were
established in each of the fishing villages. This has been
one important contributing factor to the rather stable coastal
catches of about 2.5 and 3 million tonnes annually during
the last 60 years.2
It is here important to stress that the relative success of
the Japanese system of sea tenure — at least as seen against
the experience in most other countries, and a success which
has been paralleled in domestic forestry (Totman 1989) —has been achieved in a coastal sector which has beencommercial for centuries. Although the Japanese system ofsea tenure is not perfect, it has proved beyond doubt thatcommercial exploitation of renewable natural resources canbe sustainable and does not inevitably lead to ecologicaldisasters.
It is in this context that Japanese small-type coastal
whaling ought to be seen. It has, like fishing, had commercial
elements for centuries and JSTW must therefore be regarded
as ‘traditional’ in the Japanese context. But having
commercial elements does, as pointed out by Moeran (1992),
not mean that the whalers can do with their earnings as theypleased. On the contrary, short term commercial activities
are conducted with outsiders in order to partake in long termtransactions with insiders, thereby facilitating social andcultural reproduction of the local community. It is this local
participation which has enabled Japanese coastal fishermen
to play active roles in resource management and enforcement,
often imposing stricter regulations than required by the law.
Such conditions are precisely what advocates of sustainable

ABORIGINAL VS. NON-ABORIGINAL
WHALING
When the IWC in 1981 decided to permit aboriginalsubsistence whaling (ASW), defined as“... whaling for purposes of local aboriginal
consumption carried out by or on behalf of aboriginal,
indigenous or native peoples who share strong
community, familial social and cultural ties related
to a continuing traditional dependence on whaling
and the use of whales” (IWC 1981),
preferential treatment was given to aboriginal people whenit comes to the exploitation of renewable natural resources.
The concept ‘aboriginal’ is nowhere defined in IWC
documents. However, aboriginal whalers in the IWC context
seem to meet some criteria to qualify as ‘aboriginal,’‘indigenous’ or ‘native’ — terms which seem to be usedinterchangeably by IWC. Webster’s New World Dictionary
defines ‘aborigines’ as the first known inhabitants of a region.
Based on this definition the Icelandic, Japanese andNorwegian whalers ought to qualify but it was certainly notthese nationals the decision makers at IWC had in mind when
they coined the concept of ASW.
Subsequent in-depth studies on the Japanese STCW
clarified its characteristics in that it contained elements
common with what had been termed by IWC earlier as the
ASW.

WHALING AND SUSTAINABLE
DEVELOPMENT
It is today a widely held notion among bureaucrats,scientists, conservationists and politicians that natural
resources are best regulated if local communities, which
depend on those resources for their nutritional, economic,
social and cultural needs, are brought into active participation.
This principle is incorporated into the IUCN/UNEP/WWF
report Caring for the Earth: A Strategy for Sustainable Living
and is also laid down both in the International Covenant on
Civil and Political Rights and in the International Covenant
on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, where Article 1 ofPart 1 reads:“All peoples may, for their own ends, freely disposeof their natural wealth and resources without
prejudice to any obligations arising out ofinternational economic co-operation based on the264‘Commercial’ vs. ‘Subsistence,’ ‘Aboriginal’ vs. ‘Nonaboriginal,’ and the Concept of Sustainable
Development in the Context of Japanese Coastal Fisheries Management— 1993. The International Whaling Commission, SmallType Whaling, and Coming to Terms with
Subsistence. Human Organization 52 (3): 243251
ISGSTW (International Study Group for Small-Type
Whaling). 1992. The Report of the Symposium
on Utilization of Marine Living Resources for
Subsistence. IWC/44/SEST6
IUCN/UNEP/WWF, 1991. Caring for the Earth. A Strategy
for Sustainable Living. Gland, Switzerland
IWC (The International Whaling Commission), 1981.
Report of the ad hoc technical committee
working group on development of management
principles and guidelines for subsistence
catches of whales by indigenous (aboriginal)
peoples. IWC/33/14
Kalland, A. 1984. Sea Tenure in Tokugawa Japan: The Caseof Fukuoka Domain. In Kenneth Ruddle &Tomoya Akimichi (eds.): Maritime Institutionsin the Western Pacific, Osaka: Senri
Ethnological Studies, No. 17, pp. 11-36— 1990. Sea Tenure and the Japanese Experience: Resource
Management in Coastal Fisheries. In B. Moeran
et al. (eds.). Unwrapping Japan. Manchester:Manchester University Press, pp. 188-204— 1991. Making the Unworkable Workable: ‘Guest
Fishing’ In Japanese Coastal Waters. Resource
Management and Optimization, 18(3-4): 197210— 1994. Fishing Villages in Tokugawa Japan. London:
Curzon Press/Honolulu: University of Hawaii
Press
Moeran, B. 1992. The Cultural Construction of Value,‘Subsistence,’ ‘Commercial’ and Other Termsin the Debate about Whaling. Maritime
Anthropological Studies 5 (2): 1-15
Ohnuki-Tierney, E. 1993. Rice as Self. Japanese Identities
through Time. Princeton: Princeton University
Press
Pinkerton, E. (ed.). 1989. Co-Operative Management ofLocal Fisheries — New Directions for
Improved management & Community
Development. Vancouver: University of British
Columbia Press
Ruddle, K. 1985. “The Continuity of Traditional
Management Practices: The Case of Japanese
Coastal Fisheries”. I.K. Ruddle and R.E.
Johannes (eds.): The Traditional Knowledge
and Management of Coastal Systems in Asiaand the Pacific.
— 1987. Administration and conflict management inJapanese coastal fisheries. FAO Fisheries
Technical Paper, No.273— 1989. Solving the Common-Property Dilemma: Village
Fisheries Rights in Japanese Coastal Waters.
In Fikret Berkes (ed.). Common Property

use and co-management are looking for.
Whereas many fisheries management regimes today try
to move in the direction of more community participation,
the management of whales — as at present pursued by the
IWC — moves in the opposite direction; giving more andmore attention to people far removed from the natural
resources. It is high time that also whales are managed
according to the principles of sustainable use and local
participation.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The Government of Japan thanks Dr. Arne Kalland for his
contribution to this paper.
End notes
1. See for example the books edited by Evelyn Pinkerton (1989) and Fikret
Berkes (1989)
2. There exist now a large body of literature in English about the Japanese
sea tenure system and how it evolved. See for ex. Akimichi (1984); Akimichi
and Ruddle (1984); Kada (1984); Kalland (1984, 1990, 1991, 1994): Matsuda
and Kaneda (1984); Ruddle (1985, 1987, 1989); Ruddle and Akimichi(1989); Short (1989); Wigen (1989)

REFERENCES
Akimichi, T. 1984. Territorial Regulation in the SmallScale Fisheries of Itoman, Okinawa. In K.
Ruddle and T. Akimichi (eds): Maritime
Institutions in the Western Pacific. Osaka:
National Museum of Ethnology, Senri
Ethnological Studies No. 17, pp. 89-120
Akimichi, T. and Ruddle K. 1984. The Historical
Development of Territorial Rights and Fishery
Regulations in Okinawa Inshore Waters. In K.
Ruddle & T. Akimichi (eds): Maritime
Institutions in the Western Pacific. Osaka:
National Museum of Ethnology, Senri
Ethnological Studies No. 17, pp. 37-88
Befu, H. 1980 Political Ecology of Fishing in Japan:
Techno-environmental Impact ofIndustrialization in the Inland Sea. Research in
Economic Anthropology 3: 323-347
Berkes, F. (ed.). 1989. Common Property Resources —Ecology and Community-Based Sustainable
Development, London: Belhaven Press
Doubleday, N.C. 1989. Co-Management Provisions of theInuit Final Agreement. In E. Pinkerton (ed.) CoOperative Management of Local Fisheries —New Directions for Improved management &Community Development, Vancouver:
University of British Columbia Press, pp. 209227
Freeman, M.M.R. 1989. The Alaska Eskimo Whaling
Commission: Successful Co-Management
under Extreme Conditions. In E. Pinkerton (cd.)
Co-Operative Management of Local Fisheries— New Directions for Improved management& Community Development, Vancouver:
University of British Columbia Press, pp.137154

265IWC/46/SEST1

Resources — Ecology and community-basedsustainable development, pp. 168-184
Ruddle, K. and Akimichi, T. 1989. Sea Tenure in Japanand the Southwestern Ryukyus. In J. Cordell(ed.) A Sea of Small Boats, Cambridge, Mass.:
Cultural Survival, Inc., pp. 337-70
Short, K.M. 1989. Self-Management of Fishing Rights by
Japanese Cooperative Associations: A Case
Study from Hokkaido. In J. Cordell (ed.) A Sea

of Small Boats, Cambridge, Mass.: Cultural
Survival, Inc., pp.371-387
Totman, C, 1989. The Green Archipelago. Forestry inPreindustrial Japan. Berkeley & Los Angeles:
University of California Press
Wigen, K. 1989. Shifting Control of Japan’s Coastal Waters.
In J. Cordell (ed.) A Sea of Small Boats,
Cambridge, Mass.: Cultural Survival, Inc., pp.
388-410266

IWC/46/SEST2SMALL-TYPE WHALING AND
THE SOCIO-ECONOMIC IMPLICATIONS OF A ZERO-CATCH LIMITDOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY JAPAN TO THE IWC
1986-93
The Government of Japan
1994
1986 TC/38/AS2

Small-type Whaling in Japan’s
Coastal Seas
1987 IWC/39/25
Japan’s Small-type Subsistence
Whaling
IWC/39/26
History of the Consideration ofAboriginal Subsistence Whaling
1988 IWC/40/23
Small-type Coastal Whaling inJapan: Report of an International
WorkshopNo number
Women's Tales of Whaling: Life
Stories of 11 Japanese Women who
Live with Whaling
1989 IWC/41/21
Report to the Working Group on
Socio-Economic Implications of a
Zero-Catch Limit
IWC/41/SE1 Socio-Economic Implications of a
Zero-Catch Limit on Distribution
Channels and Related Activities in
Hokkaido and Miyaki Prefectures
IWC/41/SE3 Small-type Coastal Whaling in
Ayukawa: Draft Report of Research
TC/41/STW1 Contemporary Socio-Cultural
Characteristics of Japanese Smalltype Coastal Whaling
TC/41/STW2 Japanese Whaling Culture: Continuities and Diversities
TC/41/STW3 The Spread of Whaling Culture inJapan1990 TC/42/SEST2 Socio-Economic Impact Countermeasures in the Four Japanese STCW
Communities
TC/42/SEST3 Distinguishing between Japanese
STCW and LTCW Relation to
Coastal Whale Fishery Management
TC/42/SEST7 Operational Plan for Japanese Smalltype Whaling
TC/42/SEST8 Quantification of Local Need for
Minke Whale for the AyukawaBased Minke Whale Fishery
TC/42/SEST9 Japan’s Answers to Questions on
Japanese STCW
No number
Whaling Towns and Tourism:
Possibilities for Development ofTourism at the Former Whaling
Towns — Taiji, Wada and Ayukawa
No numberEndangered Culture: JapaneseWhaling in Cultural Perspective

1991 TC/43/SEST1

The Cultural Significance ofEveryday Food Use
TC/43/SEST2
Socio-Economic Implications of
Zero-Catch Limit: Some
Examples of Small-type Whaling
TC/43/SEST3
Summaries of Documents on
Socio-Economic Implications andSmall-type Whaling
TC/43/SEST4
Age Difference in Food Preferencewith regard to Whale Meat: Reportof a Questionnaire Survey in
Oshika Township1992 IWC/44/SEST2 Summary of Whale Meat as a
Component of the Changing
Japanese Diet in Hokkaido
IWC/44/SEST3 Commercial Distribution of Whale
Meat: An Overview
IWC/44/SEST4 The Importance of Everyday Food
Use
IWC/44/SEST5 A Critical Evaluation of theRelationship between Cash
Economies and Subsistence
Activities
IWC/44/SEST6 Similarities and Diversity in
Coastal Whaling Operations: A
Comparison of Small-Scale
Whaling Activities in Greenland,
Iceland, Japan and Norway
IWC/44/SEST/WP1
Proposal for Definition of Smalltype Whaling
No number
Whale Meat as a Component of the
Changing Japanese Diet in
Hokkaido
1993 IWC/45/SEST1 How Different are Small-type andLarge-Type Whaling
IWC/45/SEST2 List of Documents Related toJapanese Small-type Coastal
Whaling and the Socio-Economic
Implications of a Zero-Catch Limit
IWC/45/SEST3 A c t i o n P l a n f o r J a p a n e s eCommunity-based Whaling(CBW)
IWC/45/SESTWP1
Statement from Yojiro Toba,
Chairman, Japan Small-type
Whaling Association

267

IWC/46/SEST2

268

IWC/46/SEST3

SOCIAL AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE OF WHALING IN
CONTEMPORARY JAPAN: A CASE STUDY OF SMALL-TYPE
COASTAL WHALINGThe Government of Japan
1994
Key Issues in Hunter-Gatherer Research
Edited byErnest S. Burch, Jr., and Linda J. Ellanna
BERG
Oxford/Providence
1994

17 Social and Cultural Significance of Whaling inContemporary Japan: A Case Study of Small-Type
Coastal Whaling
Masami Iwasaki-Goodman and Milton M. R. Freeman
Table 17.1: Minke whale catch by STCW since1982

In contemporary Japan, small-type coastal whaling(STCW), a regulated small-scale coastal fishery thatharvests mainly minke whale, continues to demonstrate thehistorical importance of whaling in the local communities
where STCW is based. Abiding by the decision of theInternational Whaling Commission, the catching of minke
whale has been suspended by the Government of Japan since
the end of the 1987 whaling season. This paper discusses,
the production, distribution, and consumption of whale
resources in STCW communities, through which the social,
cultural, and economic significance of STCW operations
and the various impacts of the international suspension ofcommercial whaling will be analyzed.
A moratorium on all commercial whaling was adopted
by the International Whaling Commission in 1982. Thisaction reflected growth in the political sophistication of
those concerned with the protection of whales and, at thesame time, marked the beginning of an era of great
uncertainty for the small whaling towns in Japan.
Pelagic (open-sea) whaling in Antarctic waters, thebest known form of Japanese whaling and large-type
coastal whaling (LTCW), the large-scale shore-based
commercial operation harvesting large whales in Japanese
coastal waters, have both ceased and the operatingcompanies were dissolved in 1987. The third, and leastknown form of whaling, namely small-type coastal
whaling (STCW), was severely affected by themoratorium. Small-type coastal whaling (STCW), which
in previous years harvested about four hundred whales ofthree or four different species, lost a substantial part of
the annual catch quota (see Table 17.1) and, underdomestic regulation, has been continuing with a limited
harvest of small cetaceans (marine mammals) that are notaffected by the international whaling ban.

1982 — 324
1982–324
1983 — 290
1983–290
1984 — 367
1984–367
1985 — 327
1985–327
1986 — 311
1986–311

1987
— 304
1987–304
1988—0
1988–01990—01990–01991—01991–01992—01992–0SOURCE: Japan Small-type Whaling Association
Despite the end of industrial-scale whaling, which inthe past satisfied a national market for whale meat and otherproducts, there persists an intensive effort by the community
people in various parts of Japan to conserve their endangered
whaling culture for future generations. This tendency isstronger in the communities where STCW is based, due tothe localized focus and the sociocultural significance of thisparticular whaling operation.1 Besides the efforts of thelocal people to promote an understanding of the significanceof continued whaling, there have been about thirty academic
research projects undertaken in order to examine the social,
cultural, and economic aspects of STCW. These studies
have provided the basis of discussions on Japanese STCW
and the socioeconomic implications of the moratorium at
the International Whaling Commission since 1988 (seeAkimichi et al. 1988; Bestor 1989; Braund et al. 1989; Japan
1989, 1990, 1991, 1992; Kalland 1989; Takahashi et al.
1989).
Current discussions about STCW at the International
Whaling Commission are focused on the role of coastal
whaling in meeting local residents’ ‘human needs’ in thesesmall, and often remote, whaling communities. ‘Humanneeds’ are defined in relation to various social, cultural,
nutritional, and economic aspects of contemporary life inthese coastal communities. One of the more important
269

IWC/46/SEST3

aspects in understanding ‘human needs’ relates to the useof the whale carcass for human consumption. This use of
the whale primarily as food makes Japanese whaling uniqueamong the industrialized whaling countries that haveengaged in intensive large-scale commercial whaling in thepast primarily for the production of oil for industrial use.

across generations. This shared knowledge consistsof a number of different socio-cultural inputs: acommon heritage and world view, an understandingof ecological (including spiritual) and technologicalrelations between human beings and whales, special
distribution processes, and a food culture.”
This definition was confirmed by Takahashi et al.
(1989), who compared the production and processing
involved in premodern whaling with three types of modern
whaling. Discussion of continuities, similarities, and thelinkages among the different forms of whaling demonstrates
the existence of an integrated whaling culture in Japan (seealso Braund et al. 1989; Kalland and Moeran 1992: 13473).
The localized nature of STCW, unlike other forms ofmodern whaling, has also been given attention. Four STCW
communities (Abashiri, Ayukawa, Wada, and Taiji) havebeen examined by anthropologists, some of whom haveproduced papers on particular communities (e.g. Akimichi
et al. 1988: Appendix 2; Iwasaki 1988; Manderson andHardacre 1989a, 1989b; Takahashi 1987, 1991). Thesevaried studies confirm the important material and symbolic
functions of whales and whaling in these communities, andin some cases conclude that “the end of whaling means theend of these towns as viable communities” (Manderson andHardacre, 1989b: 28).
Social scientists have also investigated the local andnationwide impact associated with the current pause incommercial whaling that affected coastal whaling
operations in Japan after the end of the 1987 season. A
thorough assessment of the socioeconomic impact of themoratorium on all modern forms of whaling operations inJapan was completed (Japan 1989). This study reported aseries of negative impacts at the individual, family,community, and national levels. At the conclusion of a
discussion of this report at the 1989 International Whaling
Commission meeting, it was noted in the International
Whaling Commission Chairman’s Report of the 41st
Meeting that “the impacts pose a serious threat to thecontinued survival of these traditional small communities”(International Whaling Commission 1989: 4). This reportfurther concludes that the impacts are more seriously
damaging to STCW communities because of the localized
nature of the whaling operation and the limited economic
alternatives for the laid-off whalers in this particular fishery(see also Takahashi 1991).
An intensive discussion on the issue of whale-based
local food culture took place at the forty-second and fortythird annual meetings of the International Whaling
Commission. Various academic papers provided the bases
for critical discussion of the issue, the principal paper beinga detailed quantitative assessment of the social and cultural
significance of the consumption of whale meat in several
STCW-dependent communities in Miyagi Prefecture(Braund et al. 1990).
In response to questions raised at the forty-second

THEORETICAL DISCUSSION
A series of anthropological studies on Japanese STCW
have been conducted since 1988, when the issue of thesociocultural dimensions of localized STCW was first
discussed extensively at the forty-first annual meeting of
the International Whaling Commission. The nature ofJapanese STCW had been mostly unknown outside of Japan
until a comprehensive research project was undertaken by
an international group of anthropologists in 1988 (Akimichi
et al. 1988). One major contribution of this collaborative
research appears to be the establishment of an important
anthropological concept, namely, the Japanese whaling
culture complex.
The concept of the whaling culture complex placed
localized STCW in an appropriate national and historicalcontext. Focusing on earlier work (Kalland 1986) on thehistory of Japanese whaling during the late-feudal
Tokugawa period (1603-1868), Akimichi et al. (1988)
reviewed the historic accounts of Japanese whaling, which
revealed the continuation of several forms of coastal
whaling through transmission of knowledge and themigration of whalers over the centuries. Such a long historyof coastal whaling resulted in the development of three
diversified forms of whaling (STCW, LTCW, and pelagic
whaling) in the modern period (Akimichi et al.: 10-16).
The geographical spread of the whaling culture over
the years was examined more extensively by Kalland(1989), who focused on the migration of whalers out of theestablished whaling communities in southwestern Japan to
the newly opened whaling areas in the north. Thus STCW
is the most recently established form of the developing
Japanese whaling complex. Dating from the 1930s, STCW
focused upon the catching of several small species of whale,
thereby ensuring continuity with various traditional
whaling-related social and cultural institutions in the local
whaling communities. The historical importance of STCW
as the most recent operating phase of the long-establishedJapanese whaling cultural complex is recognized by many
Japanese, especially in the various whaling districts.
The concept of a whaling culture also made later
research on STCW coherent with respect to verifying thesocial and cultural interactions occurring in the whaling
communities. Akimichi et al. (1988) described all phasesof STCW: production, processing, distribution,
consumption, and celebration, through which importantsocial and cultural institutions such as gifting and religious
observances have been sustained. Akimichi et al. (1988:
75) define the whaling culture:“[T]he shared knowledge of whaling transmitted270

Social and Cultural Significance of Whaling in Contemporary Japan: A Case Study of Small-type Coastal Whalingannual meeting, further examination of the cultural
significance of the consumption of whale meat in everyday
meals occurred at the forty-third International Whaling
Commission meeting. Theoretical and empirical analysisof the social and cultural importance of everyday meals
indicated the critical role played by whale meat and blubber.
The report concluded: “[T]hese cultural values are rooted
in a variety of historical, symbolic, aesthetic, social, andlocational considerations” (Japan 1991: 13). Ashkenazi andJacob (1991) have independently examined the general
Japanese dietary patterns; their study confirms the role ofwhale meat as an integral part of the Japanese customary
diet, and the fact that whale-based cuisine provides the basis
for the distinctive regional identity of members of Japanese
STCW communities.
More recently, an international study group for smalltype whaling examined small-scale whaling activities inGreenland, Iceland, Japan, and Norway, and reported theirfindings at the forty-fourth meeting of the International
Whaling Commission (Japan 1992). This report proposeda resource management strategy directed at minke whaleand founded upon two principles, namely “the widelyrecognized goal of sustainable development [which]requires broadening our understanding of human/
environment relations” and “greater sensitivity toward theimportance of marine living resources in the livelihoods ofdiverse coastal communities” (Japan 1992: 1). The study
group, having demonstrated significant similarities in smallscale whaling in these four countries, points out that, while
the International Whaling Commission recognizes theGreenlandic whaling operation a subsistence whaling, it
has failed to recognize the similar nature of small-scale
whaling operations in Japan, Norway, and Iceland.
This intensive anthropological research conducted
recently on Japanese whaling and summarized above provides
a theoretical framework for future studies on different aspects

Figure 17.1: Place names mentioned in the text

Okhotsk Sea

Abashiri(RUSSIA)

HOKKAIDO
SapporoKushiroMuroran
Hakodate
MatsumaeSea of Japan
Ayukawa

HONSHÛ

Tokyo
Hiroshima

Osaka
Wada

SHIKOKU

Pacific Ocean

TaijiKYÛSHÛ

0

100

200

300KM
N

271

IWC/46/SEST3of the three distinct forms of Japanese whaling. More
important, an accumulation of the social science data on
Japanese whaling has confirmed two major roles that modern
whaling, and especially STCW, have played in thecontemporary Japanese context. First, whaling plays a strong
integrative role in the economic, social, and cultural
institutions in these small whaling communities, making
continued whaling indispensable for the social vitality andeconomic viability of these communities. And second, modern
whaling continues to fulfill its traditional role as a humanfood supplier, which is one of the key elements in satisfying'human needs' in these particular communities.

by a sixty-year-old male local historian (field notes 1986)
provides a common description of whale consumption
among the Japanese: “We don't waste any part of whale.
We eat meat and blubber and use bone for fertilizer. Every
part is used.”
Small-type coastal whaling was started around 1930 tosupply the local needs for whale meat and blubber, andsince that time it has been the sole supplier of fresh minke
whale meat. Minke whale meat produced in the STCW
fishery is distinguished from that produced by pelagic
whaling by the fact that it is cut from the freshly killed
carcass and kept chilled with ice from the time of butchering(shortly after harvesting) until it reaches the local retailstores, whale it is labelled as nama kujira (fresh whale) todifferentiate it from frozen minke whale meat.
Five Parts of the Minke WhaleIn the recent past, minke whale was consumed mostly
in Hokkaido and the area around Ayukawa in Miyagi
prefecture. Although the consumption patterns differ fromone region to the other, some generalities can be identified.
Minke whale is divided roughly into five parts according
to its preparation (see Figure 17.2).
1) Kawa (blubber) is eaten both raw and cooked. Some
blubber is salted for preservation, and then becomesan ingredient for a New Year’s ceremonial dishcalled Kujirajiru (a vegetable stew cooked withsalted blubber). Although in the past whale oil was
extracted from blubber for industrial use, in recent
years blubber has been sold exclusively as humanfood (Kalland and Moeran 1992: 110).
2) Kujiraniku (whale meat) is cut up and graded into
four ranks, depending on the shape of the cuts andthe quality of the meat. In addition to these four
ranks of meat, occasionally minke whales provide
a small quantity of localized marbled meat calledonomi. However, onomi is usually associated withlarger species of whale than the minke whale. Whalemeat is enjoyed mostly as sashimi (raw slices).
3) Oba, obaike, obaki, or obake (tail fluke) is sliced
thinly and made into a dish called sarashikujira.
Fluke is also used as an offering on the whaleboat’s
Shinto altar where, in accordance with tradition,
the distal three centimeters of the fluke is placedon the altar each time a whale is caught.
4) Saezuri (tongue) is a local delicacy, especially in
the Osaka region.
5) Unesu (ventral groove) is processed into whalebacon. In some cases, unesu is eaten raw as sashimi.
Whalers and their families also enjoy other parts of thewhale, such as the internal organs and meat scraped fromthe chin bone. In Ayukawa, such parts are cooked for saleat the local fish stores, as well as for private consumption
by the crew and boat owners (see also Akimichi et al. 1988:
66-74 for further variation in STCW town diets).
Whale Dishes
The above-mentioned five parts of the minke whale

SMALL-TYPE COASTAL WHALING
Small-scale coastal whaling operations, harvesting about
350 minke whales each year within fifty miles of shore (until
the zero-catch quota was imposed in 1988) has its major
whaling bases in three communities along the Japanese
Pacific coast and one on the Okhotsk Sea coast (see Figure17.1). Small-type coastal whaling has been a stable supplierof fresh (unfrozen) minke whale meat, Baird’s beaked whale
meat, and pilot whale meat — the necessary ingredientsfor the distinctive local cuisine and various importantceremonial dishes (see Akimichi et al. 1988: 66-74, 92-95;
Braund et al. 1990; Kalland and Moeran 1992: 145-49).
Considering the harvest level and the number ofparticipating boats, STCW has been a notably stable fishery,
regulated by both the national government and theInternational Whaling Commission.
It is the localized nature of this whaling operation, andparticularly the sociocultural significance of theconsumption, distribution, and production phases of thistype of whaling operation that critically distinguishes it fromindustrial-scale whaling.

CONSUMPTION OF WHALE MEAT
The whale, a locally available and relatively abundantnatural resource, has been long valued, hunted, and utilized
in numerous ways in order to satisfy the varied needs ofsociety throughout Japanese history. However, the primaryand most consistent use of the whale has been as humanfood (Baba 1942; Fukumoto 1960; Maeda and Teraoka
1952; Toyo Hogei 1989). The following comment madeFigure 17.2: The five main parts of the minke
whale according to the type of
preparation

272

Social and Cultural Significance of Whaling in Contemporary Japan: A Case Study of Small-type Coastal Whaling
have significantly different texture and flavor, and areprepared in order to satisfy the nutritional, social, andcultural needs of consumers. In whaling communities,
sashimi has been the major preparation choice for minke
whale meat and blubber since late Meiji times (1868-1912),
when whaling became established in the region. Kujiraniku
is sliced thinly (roughly 0.5 centimeters thick) into bitesize pieces, which are placed on a bed of shredded cabbage
or a few pieces of roughly cut crispy lettuce. In Ayukawa,red meat is often served with white blubber, presenting anaesthetically pleasing and appetizing color contrast.
The data gathered through interviews as well as research
results published by other social scientists (Akimichi et al.
1988; Iwasaki 1988; Manderson and Hardacre 1989a,
1989b; Braund et al. 1990; Japan 1991) demonstrate thatminke whale has been eaten for three principle purposes:
for ceremonial occasions, such as New Year’s eve and day,weddings, and local festivals; for marking visits andcommunity gatherings; and for everyday meals at home
and in such public institutions as schools and hospitals.
Within these broad categories, Braund et al. (1990)
identified 30 culturally significant food occasions requiring
the use of minke whale meat in STCW-associatedcommunities in Miyagi Prefecture.
At wedding receptions, for example, a large plate ofassorted sashimi, in which kujiraniku and kawa are placed
as a centerpiece, is served to highlight the occasion. Whale
dishes are a significant part of the menu served at local
shrine festivities and religious gatherings. The local priest
in Ayukawa states: “From the old days we have had whale
meat and regard this as necessary: we offer to the gods whale
meat despite the usual injunction [against] red meat. ... soit’s necessary to have whale meat for this [ritual] meal”(Manderson and Hardacre 1989a: 39).
Kujirajiru has been a regional New Year’s meal in
Hokkaido. This regional dish has been passed down
through several generations in the southwestern part of
Hokkaido. The subsequent migration of people to otherareas on Hokkaido has resulted in the widespread appealof kujirajiru throughout the island. Presently, those withancestral ties to the Matsumae and Esashi areas, but notpresently living in geographical proximity to those areas,
continue to value kujirajiru as a necessary dish at New
Year's celebrations. Kujirajiru is also symbolicallyappropriate for the occasion because whales are normallyassociated with wealth, growth and happiness. For thesame reason, sarashikujira is enjoyed as a necessary partof the New Year’s meal.
Whale dishes are served when local people gather
together for private or public purposes, or when relatives
and guests from distant communities visit the whaling
communities. Fresh kujiraniku or unesu, or frozen reservesof these foods in the whaling off-season, are prepared inorder to welcome guests to whaling towns where whale
dishes are considered meibutsu (the local speciality), andtherefore appropriate food for these occasions (see Kallandand Moeran 1992: 147-48).
Substantial use is made of minke whale products as apart of everyday meals during the whaling season.
Kujiraniku is often served at dinner as sashimi while fresh
meat is abundant and reasonably priced. People are
motivated to prepare whale dishes because of theirfamiliarity with the taste of whale, a result of having lived
in the whaling towns and of having been exposed to the
local whale-based cuisine. Whale meat provided the major
source of animal protein during the period of food shortage
immediately after World War II. At that time, people reliedheavily upon whale meat for maintenance of their nutritionalbalance, and some people in Abashiri still recall the hardshipof daily life during that period (field notes 1986): “At thattime, whale was almost a staple food. There was not enoughof other food to eat. If it had not been for whale, we would
have been starved.” However, some who associate whale
dishes with the food shortages of those times tend to have anegative image of whale meat as a cheap and tasteless meat
substitute.
In Ayukawa, apart from its extensive use in everyday
meals, minke whale meat is served at public institutions as
a part of the regular menu. Whale dishes are considered
nutritionally and culturally appropriate food to be servedto those with special needs in places such as hospitals andschools.

DISTRIBUTION
Consumers, including whalers and their families,
generally acquire whale meat through two distribution
channels: customary sharing and gifting, and commercial
distribution.
Customary Sharing and Gifting
Formal gift-giving is an established social and cultural
institution observed throughout Japan (Befu 1968). In thecase of STCW communities, whale meat and blubber
perform a key function in the exercise of this important
institution. The first of a series of whaling-associated gifting
ceremonies is carried out at the beginning of the whaling
season. Gifts given to boat owners to celebrate funaoroshi(bringing a boat to the harbor) and hatsuryoiwai (the firstcatch celebration) are reciprocated by the gift of a share of
the first whale caught for that year (Akimichi et al. 1988:
43-51).
Gifting of whale products continues throughout thewhaling season. Whaling crews, factory workers, and boatowners each receive their share of whale meat and blubber
when a whale is caught. Further distribution also takes placefrom these original recipients to their relatives, neighbors,
friends, and business partners: One elderly woman
expressed the importance of such exchanges (field notes
1986): “We are farmers. So we give next door neighbors
our vegetables. They give us some whale meat and blubber.”
Seasonal gifting, such as seibo (the end of year gift)
and chugen (the mid summer gift), are also important
occasions when whale products are exchanged, as are other273

IWC/46/SEST3

gift items. Customary sharing of whale products is morecommon locally in the whaling communities, but also
extends outside of the local community, functioning as amechanism to promote social solidarity, alliance, andidentity (Akimichi et al. 1988: 41-51; Iwasaki 1988: 4755; Manderson and Hardacre 1989b: 19-22; Kalland andMoeran 1992: 141-45, 156):“I have relatives in Yoichi where people have tohave kujirajiru for New Year’s. Every year theywait for me to send them some salted blubber. My
son, a whaler, buys me some from oyakata (boss)
so that I can send it to my relatives” (seventy-yearold wife of a whaler, quoted in Iwasaki 1988: 49).
Customary gifting may involve both commercial andnoncommercial distribution. Producers of whale meat andthose in their gifting network engage in exchanges involving
whale meat; such transactions do not involve cash, and thus
are essentially noncommercial in nature. However, thecommercial distribution of whale products may itself fulfill
socially and culturally important roles when, for example,
a person is required to buy whale meat and blubber in orderto give an appropriate gift to his or her gifting partner.
Therefore, edible whale products, whether obtained throughFigure 17.3: Consumption and distribution patternsof minke whale in Hokkaido according towhale product categories (see p. 274 for
number descriptions)2

Okhotsk Sea
1, 2

1, 2

2, 3

Abashiri

HOKKAIDO

Sapporo5(RUSSIA)Kushiro1, 2

Muroran
1, 2MatsumaeHakodate
3, 5

3, 4, 5
Ayukawa

HONSHÛ

Pacific Ocean

Tokyo

Wada

274

noncommercial or commercial channels may befunctionally similar in social and cultural terms in ensuringthat customary gifting is appropriately celebrated.
Commercial Distribution
Whale products are mostly distributed throughestablished commercial networks, with a very small portion
sold directly by the whalers to the consumers, when, forexample, the local people visit the flensing station or themeat-boxing factory. (However, changes are occurring asa result of the whaling moratorium; see Takahashi 1991).
In Ayukawa, the local Fishery Cooperative Association,
which is responsible for distributing whale products,
auctions variable-sized lots to local wholesalers. The
Abashiri whaling companies on the other hand, sell theirproducts directly to local distributors who deal with thelocal markets as well as other markets throughout Hokkaido(Bestor 1989).
An important feature in the commercial distribution of
the STCW- produced whale product is that it represents ahighly localized distribution, which differs significantly
from the centralized marketing systems that distributed
whale products formerly produced by the large-scale
whaling corporations. (For differences between the
distribution system operating in Japanese STCW and
LTCW, see Japan 1990.) In the case of STCW, the small
geographical distance from the flensing station or landing
port to the local market enables the local distributors tomaintain a regular supply of high quality fresh (unfrozen)minke whale meat throughout the whaling season. As
mentioned above, it is the nature of this ‘fresh minke’ thatclearly separates the STCW-derived minke whale meat fromthe other minke whale meat (from the Antarctic), which isheld, shipped and, sold frozen.
The commercial distribution of whale products is
closely connected with regionally specific events havingsocial and cultural significance. In Hokkaido, most of thewhale products are consumed within the Hokkaido region,
with high demand in Abashiri and the neighboring
communities. A small quantity of oba, unesu, and saezuri
are sent out to those areas where the demands are especiallygreat (see Figure 17.3). In the Matsumae and Esashi area,
kujirajiru is the traditional dinner for New Year’s Eve andDay. Throughout Hokkaido, kujirajiru is often served onthese occasions and salted blubber is one of the gift items
at seibo. Salted blubber is sold at fish stores or supermarkets
in most cities and towns in Hokkaido just before New Year’s
Eve. While some salted blubber is sold directly to thefishermen from Matsumae and Esashi who fish from
Abashiri port, the remainder is sold through the distributors
in Abashiri and Kushiro, which are both governmentdesignated landing ports for minke whale.
Oba is another item that is sold just before New Year’s
Eve at local fish stores or supermarkets in the cities andtowns in Hokkaido for use in osechi (the New Year’s dish).
Kujiraniku constitutes a major part of total minke whale
production. To be distributed to consumers, kujiraniku isSocial and Cultural Significance of Whaling in Contemporary Japan: A Case Study of Small-type Coastal Whaling
further divided into four grades according to the shape andquality of the meat: highest grade A, second highest B, third
highest C, and the lowest D. Meat judged to be of A or C
quality is likely sold to the central cities in Hokkaido, andmeat of B or D quality tends to be sold locally or in theneighboring communities around Abashiri.
In the case of Hokkaido, the localities where whale
consumption is most pronounced are widely scatteredaround the coastal area throughout the prefecture. The
reason for this is that there have been a large number ofwhaling bases for both large-type coastal whaling and smalltype coastal whaling all around the coastal area in Hokkaido
during the last fifty years (see Figure 17.4; see also Tato
1985). Whale dishes therefore, were adopted into the local
diet and continue to be favored dishes for people living inthese former whaling districts up to the present day.
One minke whale product is exported from Hokkaido.
This is saezuri, especially favored in the Osaka region incentral Japan. However, in terms of both product weightand value, the quantity of export is quite small. It is also
important to note that some proportion of the whale productexported from Hokkaido returns, as in the case ofsarashikujira and unesu.

Figure 17.4: Whaling station locations in Hokkaido
from 1990 to the present (after Terry
1950)
Wakkanai

Okhotsk Sea
Mombetsu
Abashiri

HOKKAIDO(RUSSIA)

NemuroHanasaki
KushiroKiritappu
Akkeshi

MuroranEsashiMatsumaeBirocommunity. Second, kinship appears to play an importantrole in crew composition, for often crew members are
related to others on the boat or to the boat owner’s family.
Kin ties are frequent in the wider network that includes
the crew, the boat owners, and their immediate andextended families (see Kalland and Moeran 1992: 123133 for discussion of recruitment patterns in STCW).
Traditionally, promotion over the years from cook todeck hand, and, in some cases, finally to harpooner took
place on a STCW boat, though the succession could involve
various employment moves between STCW, LTCW, andpelagic whaling boats. However, as the number of whalingboats in all three forms of whaling in Japan was successively
reduced due to domestic as well as international regulation,
the total number of whaling-crew openings also became
reduced. Thus, chances for promotion became scarce. A
decided status hierarchy exists in the crew, with the positionof harpooner being the most prestigious.
STCW Companies
The nine STCW boats are mostly owned by small,family-business enterprises established in the whaling
communities. For the past several years, seven of the eightcompanies each owned one boat, and one company owned
two boats. One of the nine boats is operated by the local
Fishery Cooperative Association.
The STCW boat owners are mostly heirs of the familybusiness: their continued dedication to the whaling enterpriseconsequently stems from the pride and obligation boat owners
have toward maintaining the family business that theirancestors have established. Such feelings are expressed instatements like the following: “If the time comes that whaling
must stop completely, then I feel that my ancestor’s workand history and culture will be gone” (former Taiji harpooner
with 30 years of whaling experience, as reported in San
Francisco Examiner 1988: 36).
The family tradition involves harpooners and otherwhaling boat crewmen as well as meat processors, flensers,

PRODUCTION
The STCW operational strategy has been dictated byweather, variable whale distribution and behavior patterns
and, to a large degree, by the national government's
Ministerial Ordinance for Licenses and Regulation of
Designated Fisheries. This ordinance defines permissible
operational details, including, for example, the length of
the whaling season, the caliber of the cannons, specificationsof landing and flensing stations, and prohibitions about
catching lactating female whales.
In STCW the scale of production is extremely limited
compared to the other forms of whaling in Japan. Consistent
with the consumption and distribution patterns of STCW,
the production phase is also localized, in that a high degreeof social, cultural, and economic integration occurs within
the local community. A description of crew composition,company structure, and hunting activities will be presented
in order to provide a better understanding of operational
aspects of this fishery.
Crew Composition
The STCW boat crew usually includes a harpooner,
captain, engineer, a few deck hands, and a cook. In addition
to the boat crew, there are a small number of specialized
flensers and temporary assistants who process the carcass
at the land station. Before the ban on minke whaling,
seventy-five full-time workers and thirty-eight seasonal
helpers were employed by the eight companies engaged
in STCW in Japan (Japan 1989: 6). The social
characteristics of the STCW employees characteristicallydiffer from those of whalers engaged in both LTCW andpelagic whaling. First, the crews generally consist of local
people having their permanent residence in a STCW

275

IWC/46/SEST3

and retailers. Manderson and Hardacre (1989a: 49-52)
report on an Ayukawa area family of specialized
processors of kabura (a dish prepared from whale
cartilage) who learned the techniques from Taiji whalers.
This family passed on their business for four generations
through adoptions, in the absence of biological sons, tomaintain the family line. Small-scale family businesses
such as this, involved with processing whale products,
constitute an integral and important part of the local
economy in STCW communities by providing stable
employment opportunities to local people.
Through socialization, the younger members of thewhaling communities develop understanding andknowledge involved in whaling and other whaling-related
work, as a seventy-year-old widow of a whaler explained(field notes 1986):“Two of my sons, now both whalers, loved visiting
their father on the boat. They spent hours and hours
playing around the boat and dreamt to be whalers
just like their father... [and] when their father was
hospitalized for three months before he died, thesesons went to ask him more about whaling. I
remember my husband giving directions to themin his bed.”
It is through this process of occupational socializationthat the continued recruitment and maintenance of STCW
in the whaling towns has been assured.
Small-type coastal whaling also helped the financial
wellbeing of the whaling towns by providing predictability
and stability for the local economy; a steady harvest of thestrictly controlled annual quota and a guaranteed local
market for the product ensured economic stability. The local
community clearly benefited from such economic security,especially when the other coastal fishing industries haveshown recent evidence of serious decline. Another apparent
economic gain from STCW was the revenue to the local
Fishery Cooperative Association that STCW provided insome whaling towns. The most noticeable case is found in
Ayukawa, where STCW companies provided the Oshika
Fishery Cooperative Association 79 percent of its total
annual revenues in 1987 (Bestor 1989; see also Japan 1989:
24-32 for data on similar situations in other STCW
communities).
Harvest Activities
In STCW, the catching operation is usually completed
in one day. On rare occasions, when weather and ocean
conditions permit, boats may stay overnight on the whaling
ground if the hunt has been unsuccessful during the day.
Small-type coastal whaling boats hunt whales within about
fifty miles of the coast, due to the boats’ limited range andin order to avoid possible accidents caused by sudden sea
or weather changes. Another reason for limiting the area of
operation is that STCW boats generally return immediately
to the flensing station (or to the government-approved
landing port when sailing in Hokkaido waters), so the whale
meat reaches consumers in as fresh a condition as possible.

Whaling operations start with the search for a whale.
Because STCW boats are not equipped with the electronic
whale-locating devices used on LTCW and pelagic whalingboats, human eye-sight and binoculars are the means used
to locate whales from the masthead. Thus, good weather
and relatively calm sea conditions are essential for a
successful whale search. Sighting the whale is of great
importance in STCW operations, as it grants a boat theexclusive right to harvest that particular whale. Therefore,a differential bonus system has been developed to reward acrew for sighting different species of whale (Japan 1989:
Appendix II).
Once a whale is sighted, a boat moves into the area
near the whale to enable the harpooner to aim at it. In
approaching a whale, a small motorboat may be used tohelp turn the whale toward the whaling boat, thus reducing
pursuit time and the chance of missing the whale, andoverall, significantly increasing the efficiency of thewhaling operation (Kalland and Moeran 1992: 105-106).
Shooting a harpoon successfully requires long-term
training and experience. The prestige associated withsuccess as a harpooner is consistent throughout the historyof Japanese whaling (Fukumoto 1960). Similarly,
harpooners on STCW boats are granted exclusive authority
to coordinate the details of all sailing and hunting activities
once a whale is being pursued. At the moment of shooting
a harpoon, other crew members on board assist the
harpooner, who aims at the whale and pulls the trigger witha silent prayer.
Flensing is carried out in two different ways, dependingon the whaling ground. In coastal areas near Ayukawa, thewhales are towed to the designated flensing station whereland workers who specialize in flensing expertly cut up thewhale. In Hokkaido waters, initial butchering is done on
board,2 with the whale meat subsequently shaped and boxedin a factory near the government-designated landing port.
Workers who are engaged in flensing or boxing are often
retired whalers, or women or neighbors who come to help
on a part-time or seasonal basis in order to receive a shareof whale meat as payment, in addition to cash, for the work
performed.

SMALL-TYPE COASTAL WHALING SINCE
THE MORATORIUM
In 1985 the International Whaling Commission
instituted a ban on the commercial harvest of those species
internationally accepted as falling under the Commission's
management competence. The Japanese government agreed
to implement this decision at the close of the 1987 season
for the STCW minke whale fishery. As a consequence of
this decision, the minke whale quota for the Japanese smallscale coastal whale fishery was reduced to zero, resulting
in an overall harvest reduction of about 46 percent by weightin 1988 compared to the previous year (Japan 1989: 1). Asa further consequence, the annual harvest activity of STCW
became concentrated on the catch of Baird’s beaked whale276

Social and Cultural Significance of Whaling in Contemporary Japan: A Case Study of Small-type Coastal Whaling
and pilot whale, both of which continue to be regulated by
the Japanese government. The number of registered boats
and STCW licenses have not changed: eight STCW
companies continue to operate and nine STCW boats arelicensed to operate, as in the past twenty years.
However, in order to rationalize operating costs under
the currently reduced harvest quota, the STCW operators
have been operating a reduced number of boats: six boats
in the 1988 whaling season, and four in the 1989, 1990,
and 1991 seasons. This reduced number of boats is sufficientto harvest the authorized annual quota of sixty Baird’s
beaked whale (reduced to fifty-four in 1990 and 1991) andfifty pilot whales. In 1989, a newly opened southern whaling
ground, also with quota of fifty pilot whales, was authorized
by the Japanese authorities. However, so far the hunt inthis new area has proved unsuccessful.
The supply of minke whale meat is extremely limited
at present. Currently, the only source comes from thenational distribution of the by-products from the annual
Antarctic scientific research program (see Japan [1989:
Appendix I] for organization details of this distribution
system, and Ward [1992: 30-33] for an economic analysisof this activity).
However, frozen minke whale meat from the Antarctic
is not an appropriate substitute for fresh minke whale meatbecause of the difference in quality. Furthermore, the limited
amount of meat resulting from the research is insufficient
to satisfy both the local demand in STCW communities
and the total national demand for whale meat. Whale dishes
are now often referred to as natsukashii tabemono (nostalgicfood). Strong sentiments concerning whale dishes wererepeatedly expressed by consumers like this sixty-five-yearold male (nonwhaler) who reported (field notes 1986): “Wenever get tired of whale dishes. It makes me feel sad tothink it is no longer available. We really miss the taste ofminke whale.”
The interruption in supplies of whale products has
compromised the integrity of various local community
institutions. The exchange of gifts necessarily occurs lessfrequently since the ban on minke whaling, with aconsequent weakening of social solidarity. Some of theother ceremonies ordinarily strengthening the symbolic
function of whale and whaling in some STCW communities
have been dramatically reduced in the absence of whaling
activities in their coastal waters. In the case of Ayukawa,
where the whale-based cuisine and whaling provided thebasis for local tourism, the loss of whaling has negatively
affected a wide range of local businesses, such as shops,
inns, and restaurants. With the ensuing economic distresscaused by the loss of jobs and reduced revenues of theFishery Cooperative Association and local businesses,
consequent social dislocations have variously and seriously
undermined the continued vitality and viability of thesewhaling communities (Japan 1989: 40).
Despite the drastic changes occasioned by the restrictedsupply of minke whale meat, the local people in STCW

communities continue to seek ways to normalize the smallscale whaling operations. The request for an exemption fromthe moratorium on commercial whaling was first presented
at the International Whaling Commission meeting in 1986,
at which time the many social and cultural similarities
between small-scale Japanese coastal whaling and North
American and Greenlandic subsistence whaling (carried out
by aboriginal people) were presented (Japan 1986). In 1988,
a thorough documentation of Japanese STCW accompanied
by a petition from the local townspeople was presented at
the International Whaling Commission meeting. A special
effort was made at the forty-first International Whaling
Commission meeting in 1989 by the mayor of Oshika
township, within which the Ayukawa whaling community
is situated. The mayor presented a plea for the resumptionof minke whaling and was accompanied at that meeting by
all eight whaling boat owners. Statements by the mayor
and boat owners included detailed explanations of the
impacts of zero quotas, and these explanation were againoffered at the forty-second, forty-third and forty-fourth
meetings in the three following years. The persistence withwhich efforts are made to continue STCW signals theimportance of whaling and whaling-related activities inthese coastal communities.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION
An examination of three phases of STCW operations— consumption, distribution, and production — as well as
the description of the current situation during the hiatus inminke whaling caused by the moratorium, has indicatedsome important characteristics found in this form ofwhaling. An examination of consumption patterns of minke
whale meat and blubber demonstrates the total utilizationof the whale carcass for human consumption. Five mainparts of the minke whale carcass are prepared andsubsequently consumed in various localities where whale
products are favored. The most common preparation of
STCW products at present is sashimi, which is eaten bothas a ceremonial dish and as an everyday meal during thewhaling season. Small-type coastal whaling is the sole
supplier of fresh minke meat, the most preferred ingredientfor kujira sashimi, which consumers distinguish from frozen
minke whale meat produced in other whaling operations. It
was also noted that minke whale consumption patterns are
deeply rooted in the historical, social, and cultural accountsof the local peoples’ lives. Not only does the preferred taste
for whale dishes motivate consumers to prepare them, but
symbolic values attached to the whale make such dishes
appropriate for particular social or ceremonial occasions.
This is often reinforced by means of a past and present
association with a whale-meat diet and with whaling. The
whale-based cuisine involves important social dimensions,as socially and ceremonially important gatherings andvisiting in whaling towns are often celebrated by sharing
whale dishes.
Whale products are distributed through commercial and277

IWC/46/SEST3

noncommercial means, allowing consumers to satisfy avariety of socially and culturally significant consumption
needs. People who have both direct and indirect ties withthe whalers participate in gift exchanging, during which
whale is the main gift item. Though such social interaction
with the whalers, local people have access to whale meatand blubber. Another means of access is provided bymiddlemen who distribute the meat commercially.
Regardless of the degree of commercialism involved in themeans of distribution, the consumers are socially, andculturally motivated to make use of the STCW products,
which, in turn, sustain traditional institutions and values.
The most important characteristic of the commercial
distribution of STCW products is that it is highly localized.
The initial distribution takes place at the landing port andinvolves local distributors who market the products
primarily in the whaling community, and also in thoseneighboring communities that have historic, social andcultural links with the whaling community. Such an efficient
distribution system enables fresh minke whale meat to reachconsumers in the best condition. The localized nature of
the distribution, furthermore, makes STCW an integral andessential part of the local economy.
The production phase of the STCW operation can becharacterized by its high efficiency. STCW production
operations are small-scale in order to achieve optimal
production, during which a whale carcass is kept chilled tomaintain the high quality required to meet exacting culinary
standards. Harvest activities are conducted within a limited
coastal area involving a minimum number of local crews
so that efficiency in production is maximized. The social
dimension of the production phase of whaling is also
noteworthy; an intimate work situation creates a close unity
among the crew members. Such unity is further reinforcedby the fact that kinship has traditionally, and currently to acertain degree, played an important role in recruitment of
whalers. Such intimate social unity is a vehicle for thetransmission whaling knowledge and technology fromgeneration to generation.
What, then, is the social and cultural significance of
the STCW operation in present-day Japan? The answer
becomes more apparent when the three phases of STCW
are viewed in the context of the Japanese whaling culturalcomplex. The activities in three phases of STCW operations
are concentrated in the present STCW communities andextend to other areas identifiable within the whaling culturalcomplex. The analysis of consumption patterns
demonstrates the existence of a diversified regional minke
whale-based cuisine maintained in the northern part ofJapan. Historical development of Japanese whaling has

fostered widespread whale-eating customs in different
regions. The minke whale cuisine forms a part of thishistorical diversity, and remains vital for the maintenanceof the continually changing Japanese whaling culture.
STCW provides a regular and reliable supply of freshminke whale meat in these regions through localizedcommercial and noncommercial distribution networks.
Distribution of minke whale products originated in the local
whaling community and extended to the area where sociallyand culturally identifiable needs for minke whale meat andblubber were maintained. The STCW distribution system
ensured a continuous supply of fresh mink whale meat in
the area where whaling and the associated whale-based foodculture has fostered consumption needs for whale meat.
Practical considerations involved in producing freshminke whale meat place limitations upon the scale and areaof operation. STCW boats operate from the governmentdesignated ports within a limited distance, which allows
them to return to port while the meat stays fresh.
A locally developed distinctive whale-based cuisine,
efficient coastal whaling operations, and localized
distribution network together form a cohesive system thatsustains important social, cultural, economic, and nutritional
needs of the local community. Such an adaptive system,
though relatively recent in origin and technologicallymodern in some important respects, nevertheless serves tomaintain the long-established, culturally varied, and yet
clearly identifiable Japanese whaling culture incontemporary Japan.
The present distress observed in the STCW
communities demonstrates the obvious negative impactsof the International Whaling Commission’s decision to
prolong the pause imposed on all commercial whaling. The
persistence with which the local people have been appealing
for the normalization of their small-scale coastal minke
whale fishery has its roots in all of the critical social, cultural,and economic relationships linking this fishery to thesurvival of these small distinctive coastal communities.

End notes
1. Kalland and Moeran (1992: 18) define a whaling community as “a groupof people directly or indirectly involved in whaling related activities (suchas the catching, flensing, processing, and/or marketing of whales and whale
products), and for whom whaling related activities are important elementsin the establishment of their self-identity.” In the case of the STCW fishery,
the whaling communities are the subcultural groups within an administrative
unit (Abashiri, Oshika, Wada, and Taiji) that are identifiable within theconcept of the Japanese whaling cultural complex.
2. Special permission is granted by the Japanese whaling authorities for onboard flensing during minke whaling operations only in Hokkaido waters.

278

IWC/46/SEST4ACTION PLAN FOR JAPANESE COMMUNITY-BASED WHALING(CBW) (IWC/45/SEST3 REV.)The Government of Japan
1994

1.

DEFINITION

3.

Community-based whaling is small scale yet having
significant socioeconomic, cultural and dietary importancewithin local communities. This community-based whaling
shares to a large degree socio-cultural characteristics foundin many subsistence-based societies. These characteristics
include, e.g. local residence of boat owners and crew
members, the widespread gift and ritual exchanges of whale
products within the community, and gifts to kin members
and friends residing outside the community, and thetransmission of whaling lore and skills from generation to
generation within the community. As with other hunting
societies practicing subsistence, profound social and cultural
significance is associated with catching, processing,
distributing, consuming and celebrating the catch inconformity with local tradition (IWC/44/SEST5) to theextent that interference with these practices seriously
endangers the viability and vitality of these traditionalsocieties (e.g. IWC/41/SEl; IWC/41/SE3).
The products of community-based whaling areprimarily to be consumed in these existing whaling
communities. The sizes of the vessels used by thecommunity-based whaling are not more than 26 metres inlength, less than 50 tons in weight. The area in which thecommunity-based whaling operates does not exceed 50
nautical miles off the Japanese coasts.

2.

SPECIFICATION FOR OPERATIONS OF
THE CBW(1) The port of landing the whale products:
1) Abashiri City on the north-east coast of Hokkaido
in the Sea of Okhotsk in the Sub-Area 11 specified
by the North Pacific minke whale trial by IWC
Scientific Committee (IWC/45/4)
2) Hamanaka-cho off south-east coast of Hokkaido,
provided the products landed there are immediatelytransferred to Ayukawa, Taiji and Wada in the SubArea 73) Ayukawa off Sanriku, on the Pacific Coast of
Oshika Peninsula in the Sub-Area 7(2) Areas of Operation
Areas of operation are generally identified as shaded
area in the Annex to this paper. They are all within 50 n.
miles off the coastal line of Japan.

4.

DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMPTIONOF MINKE WHALES TAKEN BY THE
CBW

The minke whales caught by the CBW shall be
exclusively distributed and consumed in the local
communities specified in the Paragraph 2 above. The term
and the conditions for such distribution and consumption
shall be as follows:
1) 80% of the whale meat should be consumed in therespective community identified in the Paragraph
2 above for the exclusive use by the community.
2) 20% of the whale meat may be distributed andconsumed in the adjacent areas of the respective
community identified in the Paragraph 2 above by
the relatives and the related facilities and locations
which have historical adherence to the CBWcommunities.
3) The Government of Japan shall ensure thatadministrative guidance is provided to theauthorities of the four communities which would
eliminate any commercial distribution of whale
products (further explanation is shown in IWC/
46/31).

IDENTIFICATION OF THE COMMUNITY-BASED WHALING COMMUNITIESThe following four coastal communities are identified
as the community-based whaling communities. The whale
products taken by the community-based whaling are
exclusively for local and consumption by the fourcommunities identified below.
1) Abashiri in north-eastern Hokkaido
2) Ayukawa on the north-eastern tip of Oshika
Peninsula in Miyagi Prefecture , Honshu
3) Wada on the Pacific coast of Chiba Prefecture,
Honshu4) Taiji on the Pacific coast of Kii Peninsula,
Wakayama Prefecture, Honshu

279IWC/46/SEST4

5.

ESTABLISHMENT OF CATCH LIMITS

research on the stock abundance and monitoring inaccordance with the Guideline for Conducting Survey ofRMS.

1) The catch limit of 50 North Pacific Minke whales
for the interim Relief Allocation (IRA) has noharmful effect on the stock. A take of 50 whales isless than the replacement yield of 209 (Rep. Int.
Whal. Commn. 42: 162, 11.2).
2) Catch Limits to be established for the IRA as
specified above are as follows:(1) Sub-Area 11.......13 animals (July-September)(2) Sub-Area 7......... 37 animals (April-September)Those catch limits are set fully taking into account ofbest available information on stock identity and fishingseason in which no mixing occur from the Sea of Japan
stock to Sub-Area 11 and Sub-Area 7.

6.

8.

9.

SUPERVISION AND CONTROL

10. REPORTING
A national inspector shall report catch data and otherdata collected from each vessel required by the data required
as input to the Catch Limit Algorithm (Rep. Int. Whal.
Commn. 45: 44) as well as the guideline for data collection
and analysis under the RMS other than those direct input
for the catch limit algorithm (46 IWC SC Report, AnnexX) to IWC Secretariat.

SURVEY AND MONITORING
Japanese Government shall continuously conduct

Figure 1:

VERIFICATION

Each vessel shall be equipped with the Global
Positioning System (GPS) to identify the location of theoperating vessel on real-time basis and the location shallbe monitored by a national inspector at all times.

Each land station shall accept a national inspector andan international observer to fully make sure the operations
comply with the Revised Management System. Such an
inspector shall collect the data specified in RMS.

7.

NUMBER OF VESSELS

A maximum of 9 vessels only belonging to the CBWcommunities identified in the foregoing Paragraph 2 andlicensed since 1954 shall be used.

Map showing location of past whaling grounds and the 13 sub-areas chosen for the
implementation trials (see text)

60°

52°
50°

12
10
40°

6

Ayukawa

Wada

5
131

13

141
Abashiri(Akkeshi)

7

8

9

3

4

Taiji

30°

1
120

127

2
130

140

280

150

157

160

170

IWC/46/31 Rev. 2

ACTION PLAN FOR JAPANESE COMMUNITY-BASED WHALING(CBW): DISTRIBUTION AND CONSUMPTION OF WHALE
PRODUCTSThe Government of Japan
1994

CONTENT OF THE ACTION PLAN

The International Whaling Commission, at its 45th
annual meeting in Kyoto, adopted by consensus a
Resolution (IWC/45/), resolving “to work expeditiously to
alleviate the distress to CBW communities.”
The Action Plan (IWC/46/31) was presented to theWorking Group on Socio-Economic Implication and SmallType whaling at the 46th IWC. Numbers of comments werereceived as a result of the discussion. The Government ofJapan has addressed these comments and specific changes
are shown by underline in this revised Action Plan (IWC/
46/31 Rev. 2).
In order that the whale meat obtained from an Interim
Relief Allocation may most effectively alleviate thehardship experienced by CBW communities, until themoratorium ends or third category is accepted, this Action
Plan sought the following objectives:
1) to ensure that the edible whale products will be
exclusively consumed in the local communities
specified in IWC/46/SEST4;2) to organize the distribution and consumption ofwhale products so as to alleviate the distress causedby the moratorium in these four CBWcommunities;3) to utilize a non-market distribution system in orderto remove the profit motivation from production
and distribution of whale products.
The active participation of the local government andcommunity citizens is indispensable to the functioningof this Action Plan. What the plan sets out to establish isa unique interim whaling operation for which the local
government and community members will work
cooperatively and from which the local community
members will be enabled to alleviate their distress causedby the whaling moratorium whilst, through an equitablescale of levies, financially supporting these measures.
This kind of operation, incorporating local community
members and organizations, will be instituted only inthose Japanese coastal whaling areas having anestablished whaling cultural tradition. This Action Plan
is a sincere response from Japan to the difficult demand
to remove commercial elements from Japanese CBW andis an interim measure taken to alleviate profound social,
cultural and dietary hardship caused by the impositionof the zero quota on traditional community-based minke
whaling operations.

1. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF SMALL-TYPE
WHALERS(1) The small-type whalers shall catch no more than
50 minke whales in accordance with the terms andconditions established by the IWC and relevantJapanese laws and regulations (as specified in IWC/
46/SEST4).
(2) The small-type whalers shall land the catches atthe ports specified in IWC/46/SEST4.
(3) The small-type whalers shall flense the landed
carcasses and process them into products specified
by a Management Council for Whale Meat
Production and Distribution (hereinafter referred toas ‘the Council’).
(4) The small-type whalers shall hand over all the whale
products to the Council.
(5) The small-type whalers may request the
reimbursement only for the actual cost incurred by
the catching of minke whales and associatedhandling charges, which expenses shall be received
from the Council.
2. THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MANAGEMENTCOUNCIL FOR WHALE MEAT PRODUCTION
AND DISTRIBUTION(1) The establishment of the Council
A. A council shall be established in each of the four
CBW communities: Abashiri, Oshika, Wada andTaiji.
B. Fully aware of the distress of the above-mentioned
communities that has been imposed by the cessationof minke whaling; conscious of the long whaling
history in these communities; and noting the uniquesocial, ceremonial, symbolic, nutritional, andeconomic significance which whaling and whale
meat have rendered to these communities, and theimportant role these elements have played for thesolidarity of the community and the maintenanceof the community members’ relationships; theCouncil shall manage the whale meat distribution
in a way necessary and suitable to the requirementof the community. This will be done in recognitionof the fact that the resumption of minke whaling
under the Interim Relief Allocation, and the
distribution of its products, will make possible, to281

IWC/46/31 Rev. 2

the greatest extent, the continuation of the CBWcommunities’ historical traditions and cultural
customs and the welfare of the community
members.
C. The Council shall consist of the following members
so that it will manage, in light of the purpose of theInterim Relief Allocation, the distribution of whale
meat in each CBW community in a suitable andequitable manner, thus making the activities of theCouncil reach the highest possible level ofcredibility and transparency.
1) The head of each CBW community (mayor) or his/her alternate2) Local civil servant(s) of each CBW community’s
local executive government in charge of fisheries,
health, education, and /or tourism
3) Representative(s) of national government4) Representative(s) of local fishing cooperative
5) Representative(s) of local community citizens
6) Representative(s) of local women's community
7) Representative(s) of local youth community
8) Representative(s) of local schools and hospitals
9) Representative(s) of small-type whalers
10) Representative(s) of distributors of whale products11) Representative(s) of processors of whale products12) Academic advisors with experience in cetology and/or anthropology in whaling and whale-related
culture13) Among the 1) through 12) listed above and internal
auditor of accounts and all activities shall be elected.
***NOTE:* The auditor designated by the local government
shall be appointed as an external auditor to inspect
the overall activities and to audit accounts.
* In addition to the one referred to in 13) above, acertified public accountant shall oversee thecontents of the small-type whalers’ request for the
reimbursement of the cost, and report the results to
the Council.
(2) Activities of the Council
A. The council shall receive the processed whale meatfrom the small-type whalers.
B. The Council shall reimburse the small-whalers the
direct/variable costs incurred to catch minke whales
and recover associated handling expenses. Any
costs relating to other operations shall not be
reimbursed. These costs (exhaustively listed below)
shall be calculated for each whaling vessel,
examined and verified by a certified public
accountant or licensed tax auditor in contract with
the Council. Such items of cost as listed below shallbe approved by the Council.
— fuel costs— repair costs— pro-rated interest charge on the loan incurredby the vessel— labor costs— harpoon costs— insurance fees
— freezing and storage costs— processing costs— transportation costs— administrative overhead costs
C. The Council shall plan, in a manner suitable andequitable, the distribution of whale products in lightof the fundamental objectives of this Action Plan,
which is an alleviation of the CBW communities’
distress. In so doing, the following priorities shallbe applied in accordance with traditional practice:(a) Meat shares for the boat owners, crews and flensers.
This is a traditional practice and right entitled to allof them and must continue to be practiced;(b) Public consumption: To provide meals for nurseryschool, elementary schools and junior high schools,
hospitals and nursing homes;(c) Consumption for community festivals and rites; e.
g. Shinto festivals and rites and Buddhist festivals
and rites;(d) Consumption by community members, based uponfair and equitable distribution.
* Distribution to the adjacent areas of each CBWcommunity, where former traditional whaling
communities are located, shall be limited to (b) and(c) above.
D. The Council shall collect levies from the recipientsof the whale products in order to cover the costs ofthese interim measures. The Council shall decide
the amount of each levy, considering the actual costs
incurred to produce, flence, process, refrigerate anddistribute the whale meat. The amount of each levy
shall be publicly announced to the local citizens
before the distribution.
E. Incidental catches shall not count against the quota.
Distribution of whale meat from other legitimate
sources, shall be distributed through normal
distribution channel so as not to mix with the whale
products distributed by the Council during the CBWoperation.
F. In order to discourage any sales to outside of thecommunities and any re-sale of whale products, thesize of the whale meat which will be distributed
should be as small a block as practical; e.g. 1 kg,
and distributed on more than one occasion.
G. In discovering any injustice or irregularity in the
proscribed distribution of whale products, such asa secondary trading or trading outside of thecommunities, the Council shall exclude offenders
from future whale product distribution. Suchoffender(s) shall not receive an allocation of whale
product in the year following the offense.
H. The Council shall make an effort, to the extent
possible, to promote the understanding of the282

Action Plan for Japanese Community-based Whaling (CBW): Distribution and Consumption of Whale Products
importance of the conservation of whale resourcesamong the community citizens.
(3) A secretariat for the Council shall be establishedwithin a suitable section of each local municipality
office. It shall deal with office work such asaccounting and general administration to assist thework of the Council.
(4) The funding of the Council: The cost for the
management of the Council and its Secretariat shallbe borne by the levies collected from the local
government (city or town as applicable).
(5) Based upon the framework laid down above, eachCouncil shall adopt its own rules.
3. THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE NATIONAL
GOVERNMENT(1) The Government of Japan shall be a member of aManagement Council for Whale Meat Production
and Distribution and extend appropriate oversight,
guidance as necessary, and give advice to eachCouncil, in order to ensure the smooth operation of
the Action Plan.

(2) Each Council shall report its own activities by aspecified annual date to the national government.
(3) The Government of Japan shall submit a report to
the IWC as required by the Commission.
4. T H E R O L E O F T H E P R E F E C T U R A L
GOVERNMENT
In consultation with the national government, theprefectural government shall extend appropriate oversight,
guidance as necessary, and give advice to each Council aswell as to local government.
5. THE ROLE OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT(1) The Mayor and civil servants in charge shallparticipate as members in the Council.
(2) The local government shall co-operate with theCouncil by establishing its Secretariat in themunicipality office.
(3) The local government shall provide the Secretariat
with necessary administrative support.
(4) The local government shall financially support the
management of the Council.
(5) Fulfillment of any other tasks as required.

283

IWC/46/31 Rev. 2284